2017 LEF e-seminar: June 1st – 22nd 2017
Do join in the discussions from 1st – 22nd June 2017. Details below:
Using Linguistic Ethnography to study the teaching of professional morality
You are warmly invited to participate in the next LEF e- seminar, from 1st to 22nd June 2017. LEF’s e-seminar is an opportunity to identify and discuss the issues we all wrestle with as researchers interested in linguistic ethnography. It takes the form of an online discussion about one paper. Everyone can contribute: you might choose to describe the thoughts and associations it provokes; the analytic, methodological or substantive issues it raises for you; and you might also respond to and develop the points raised by others.
The e-seminar will take place mainly via the LEF e-mail list, with additional content on the website and on Twitter using #lingethnog.
To join the LEF email list please visit http://bit.ly/LEFsignup
The seminar facilitators are Fiona Copland and Jason Rutter. They will endeavour to ensure the discussion goes in an intellectually generative direction, identifying key issues, pulling out overlooked points, and developing emerging themes.
The paper for discussion is by Caroline Pelletier and Roger Kneebone. They will also contribute to and help to facilitate the seminar, as well as endeavour to respond to comments and thoughts on specific issues in the paper.
The paper is called ‘Learning Safely from error? Re-considering the ethics of simulation-based medical education through ethnography’, published in Ethnography and Education 11.3 (2016).
The paper is a contribution to the history of ethnographic accounts of professional morality. It examines how ‘human factors’ are taught as a subject area in hospital simulation centres, and what this teaching does in making sense of the relationship between professional knowledge and mistakes at work. Contrary to claims often made in clinical policy and literature, the analysis concludes that simulation is not a safe place to learn from failure. This is because the teaching of human factors maintains professional solidarity on an absence of identified mistakes. Attention in simulation-based clinical education should therefore move away from defining safety in relation to technology and focus instead on how the teaching of a new moral code creates interactional risks for both teachers and learners